logologo

  • Home
  • Products and Services
    • Crop Booster
    • Bio Booster
    • Yield Max Program
    • Book Pre-Sale Portal
  • Results
  • The Science
    • TRL9
    • Science Documents
    • Science Documents (Spanish)
  • About Us
    • Certifications and Awards Page
    • Our Blog
    • Harvest Harmonics Video Gallery
    • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact Us
    • Booking
    • We Are Hiring
    • Internships
  • Cart
logologo

  • Home
  • Products and Services
    • Crop Booster
    • Bio Booster
    • Yield Max Program
    • Book Pre-Sale Portal
  • Results
  • The Science
    • TRL9
    • Science Documents
    • Science Documents (Spanish)
  • About Us
    • Certifications and Awards Page
    • Our Blog
    • Harvest Harmonics Video Gallery
    • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact Us
    • Booking
    • We Are Hiring
    • Internships
  • Cart
  • Home
  • Products and Services
    • Crop Booster
    • Bio Booster
    • Yield Max Program
    • Book Pre-Sale Portal
  • Results
  • The Science
    • TRL9
    • Science Documents
    • Science Documents (Spanish)
  • About Us
    • Certifications and Awards Page
    • Our Blog
    • Harvest Harmonics Video Gallery
    • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact Us
    • Booking
    • We Are Hiring
    • Internships
  • Cart

Maize

Home / Case Studies / Maize — Odisha, India
University Field Trial · Maize · Odisha, India · 2025

Up to 32% Taller Maize With Higher Dry Matter Across All Input-Reduction Levels

At the Experimental Field of Centurion University of Technology & Management in Odisha, India, maize treated with Kyminasi® Crop Booster™ water was compared with maize receiving standard water across seven input-reduction levels. The treated maize was taller and accumulated more dry matter per plant at every level reported in the trial.

+32%
Maximum Source-Reported Plant Height Difference
+13% Dry Matter
Maximum Source-Reported DMA / Plant Difference
Date
May 2025
Location
Centurion University of Technology & Management, Odisha, India
Crop
Maize
Design
Split Plot · 7 Subplots · 3 Replications Each
Levels
0%, 10%, 25%, 40%, 55%, 70%, 100% Input Reduction
Test
Kyminasi® Crop Booster™ Water
Control
Standard Water
Inputs
Both Fields Otherwise Treated Equally
Trial Context The source states that the boosted plants received no additional chemical or non-chemical boost beyond the Crop Booster water treatment.
Maize trial at Centurion University of Technology and Management in Odisha India
Maize Field Trial · Centurion University · Odisha, India · May 2025
Measured Results

Treated maize was taller and accumulated more dry matter at every reported input-reduction level.

Across the seven reported input-reduction levels, Crop Booster-treated maize showed plant-height differences ranging from +9% to +32% and DMA per plant differences ranging from +4% to +13%. The source also describes bigger leaves, denser and greener vegetation, above-ground development, and root-zone development, particularly within the intermediate treatment levels.

+32%
Plant Height
78 cm with KPCB vs. 59 cm control at the 100% input-reduction level.
+29%
Plant Height
177 cm with KPCB vs. 137 cm control at 25% input reduction.
+27%
Plant Height
Source-reported difference at both 10% and 40% input reduction.
+13%
DMA / Plant
80.57 g with KPCB vs. 71.05 g control at 0% input reduction.

Plant Height

KPCB-treated maize was taller than the control at all seven reported input-reduction levels, with source-reported differences from +9% to +32%.

Dry Matter Accumulation

DMA per plant was also higher at every reported level, with source-reported differences ranging from +4% to +13%.

Vegetation Appearance

The source describes denser and greener vegetation across all treatment levels 45 days after seeding.

Growth & Root-Zone Observation

Bigger leaves, above-ground development, and root-zone development were reported qualitatively. No numerical root measurements were supplied.

Input Reduction Plant Height (cm) DMA / Plant (g)
KPCB Control Gain KPCB Control Gain
0% 183 149 +23% 80.57 71.05 +13%
10% 181 143 +27% 76.96 68.52 +12%
25% 177 137 +29% 73.53 67.61 +9%
40% 170 134 +27% 73.15 67.40 +9%
55% 162 132 +23% 72.82 65.79 +11%
70% 140 128 +9% 67.99 65.62 +4%
100% 78 59 +32% 60.57 57.74 +5%
Institution: Centurion University of Technology & Management
Location: Odisha, India  ·  Date: May 2025
Crop: Maize
Design: Split Plot With Seven Subplots & Three Replications Each
Input-Reduction Levels: 0% · 10% · 25% · 40% · 55% · 70% · 100%
Test: Kyminasi® Crop Booster™ Water
Control: Standard Water
Plant Height: +9% to +32% · Source-Reported Differences
DMA / Plant: +4% to +13% · Source-Reported Differences
Vegetation Observation: Denser & Greener at 45 Days · Source Reported
Additional Boost: None Reported

The table above preserves the raw values and rounded percentage gains supplied in the source. The trial describes seven levels from 0% to 100% as “input reduction,” while other narrative portions refer to “stress levels.” Because the source does not define exactly which inputs were reduced or the protocol used to establish each reduction level, this page preserves the table's “input reduction” terminology without adding an interpretation. The supplied narrative also uses the name “Kyminasi Fruits” in several places, although the trial information identifies the treatment as Kyminasi Crop Booster™ water; this version uses the treatment name associated with the trial setup. Bigger leaves, denser greener vegetation, above-ground development, and root-zone development are source-reported observations. No leaf dimensions, NDVI, GreenSeeker, SPAD, root length, root depth, root mass, final grain yield, Brix, grain quality, input quantities, or economic results were supplied.

Why this matters for maize growers: This university field trial provides direct treated and control measurements across seven reported input-reduction levels. Crop Booster-treated maize was taller and accumulated more dry matter per plant at every level in the supplied dataset, with the largest reported plant-height difference reaching 32% and the largest DMA-per-plant difference reaching 13%.

Want to learn more about Harvest Harmonics technology or discuss your maize or corn operation with our team?

For Booking or Quotes Click Here
Home / Case Studies / Maize — Meknès, Morocco
Maize Field Trial · Meknès, Morocco · 2025

27.1% Higher Maize Yield Under a 40% Reduced Irrigation Treatment

In Meknès, Morocco, LG31695 maize was evaluated under deficit irrigation with and without Kyminasi® Crop Booster™ treatment. Under the source-described 40% water-stress treatment, Crop Booster maize recorded a yield value of 70 compared with 55.07 in the control, a 27.1% difference.

+27.1%
Yield Difference at the 40% Reduced Irrigation Treatment
60% Irrigation
KPCB Treatment Relative to 100% Control
Date
January 2025
Location
Meknès, Morocco
Crop
Maize
Variety
LG31695
Trial Area
0.33 Hectare
Test Field
Kyminasi® Water Under Deficit Irrigation
Control Field
Standard Water Under Comparative Irrigation Treatments
Other Inputs
Fields Reported as Treated Equally
Trial Context The study evaluated maize under deficit-irrigation conditions. The source reports its strongest yield result under the treatment described as 40% water stress, corresponding to 60% irrigation relative to the 100% control reference.
Maize field trial in Meknes Morocco using Kyminasi Crop Booster technology
Maize Field Trial · Meknès, Morocco · January 2025
Measured Results

Yield measured 70 versus 55.07 under the reported 40% reduced irrigation treatment.

Under the source-described 40% water-stress condition, the Crop Booster treatment recorded a yield value of 70 compared with 55.07 for the control. This corresponds to approximately 27.1% higher yield. The source also reports the highest proline content in the Crop Booster plants under this treatment.

70
Crop Booster Yield
Source labels the measurement as 70 tons; the yield basis is not further defined.
55.07
Control Yield
Source labels the control measurement as 55.07 tons.
+27.1%
Yield Difference
70 compared with 55.07 corresponds to approximately +27.1%.
−40%
Irrigation Treatment
Crop Booster treatment used 60% relative to the 100% irrigation reference.

Higher Yield

The Crop Booster treatment measured 70 compared with 55.07 in the control under the reported 40% reduced irrigation treatment.

Deficit Irrigation

The source presents the control irrigation level as 100% and the Crop Booster treatment level as 60%.

Proline Content

Proline content was reported as highest in the Crop Booster plants under the 40% water-stress treatment.

Stress Response Interpretation

The source interprets the elevated proline result as an indicator associated with improved response to drought, water stress, and salinity.

Measurement Control Crop Booster Difference
Yield 55.07 70 +27.1%
Relative Irrigation Level 100% 60% −40%
Proline Content Raw Value Not Supplied Highest Under 40% Stress Source-Reported Observation
Location: Meknès, Morocco  ·  Date: January 2025
Crop: Maize
Variety: LG31695
Trial Area: 0.33 Hectare
Control Yield: 55.07 · Source Unit: Tons
Crop Booster Yield: 70 · Source Unit: Tons
Yield Difference: +27.1%
Control Irrigation Reference: 100%
Crop Booster Irrigation Treatment: 60%
Relative Irrigation Reduction: 40%
Proline: Highest in KPCB Plants Under 40% Water Stress · Source Reported
Technology: Kyminasi® Crop Booster™

The supplied measurements of 70 and 55.07 support a calculated yield difference of approximately 27.1%. The source labels these values as “tons,” but it does not state whether they are total trial production, tons per hectare, or another normalized yield measure. For that reason, this page preserves the source unit without converting the values to a per-hectare basis. The trial area is reported as 0.33 hectare, but that information alone is not sufficient to redefine the supplied yield unit. The irrigation comparison is reported as 100% for the control and 60% for the Crop Booster treatment, which represents a 40% relative reduction in the irrigation treatment. The source also reports the highest proline content in the Crop Booster plants under 40% water stress but does not provide raw proline concentrations or a statistical comparison. Its statement that this indicates improved resilience to drought, water stress, and salinity is therefore retained as a source interpretation rather than presented as an independently measured resilience percentage. No grain-quality, root-development, Brix, fertilizer-use, production-cost, or economic-return measurements were supplied.

Why this matters for maize growers: This Meknès trial provides a direct yield comparison under a deficit-irrigation treatment. With irrigation reported at 60% of the control reference, the Crop Booster treatment recorded a yield value of 70 compared with 55.07 in the control, approximately 27.1% higher. The source also reports elevated proline under the same stress treatment as a physiological response indicator.

Want to learn more about Harvest Harmonics technology or discuss your maize, corn, or irrigation program with our team?

For Booking or Quotes Click Here
Home / Case Studies / Maize — Villadiego, Mexico
Maize Study · Villadiego, Mexico · 2024

9.2% Higher Hectoliter Weight With a Source-Reported 100% Increase in Brix

In Villadiego, Mexico, a maize study conducted by Carlos Torres Barrera, Chief CDT Villadiego, compared a Crop Booster-treated field with a control. Hectoliter weight measured 77 kg/hl in the Crop Booster maize compared with 70.5 kg/hl in the control, while Brix was reported as 100% higher.

+9.2%
Calculated Hectoliter Weight Difference
77 kg/hl
Crop Booster Hectoliter Weight
Date
March 2024
Location
Villadiego, Mexico
Crop
Maize
Study Lead
Carlos Torres Barrera
Role
Chief CDT Villadiego
Comparison
Crop Booster Field vs. Control Field
Yield Measure
Average Raw Yield · ton/ha
Program Context
FIRA Trial Program · Source Reported
Trial Context The source reports a Crop Booster hectoliter weight of 77 kg/hl compared with 70.5 kg/hl in the control. This direct comparison corresponds to approximately 9.2% higher hectoliter weight.
Maize study in Villadiego Mexico comparing Crop Booster and control
Maize Study · Villadiego, Mexico · March 2024
Measured Results

Higher hectoliter weight, source-reported higher Brix, and nearly identical raw yield.

Crop Booster maize measured 77 kg/hl in hectoliter weight compared with 70.5 kg/hl in the control, approximately 9.2% higher. Average raw yield measured 9.19 ton/ha compared with 9.16 ton/ha in the control, a difference of 0.03 ton/ha or approximately 0.3%. The source separately reports Brix as 100% higher in the Crop Booster maize.

77kg/hl
Crop Booster Hectoliter Weight
Compared with 70.5 kg/hl in the control.
+9.2%
Hectoliter Weight Difference
Directly calculated from 77 kg/hl versus 70.5 kg/hl.
+100%
Brix
Source-reported difference; raw Brix values were not supplied.
9.19t/ha
Crop Booster Raw Yield
Compared with 9.16 ton/ha in the control.

Higher Hectoliter Weight

Crop Booster maize measured 77 kg/hl compared with 70.5 kg/hl in the control, a calculated difference of approximately 9.2%.

Source-Reported Brix Difference

The source reports Brix as 100% higher in the Crop Booster maize, but does not provide the underlying treated and control Brix readings.

Raw Yield

Average raw yield measured 9.19 ton/ha with Crop Booster compared with 9.16 ton/ha in the control.

Study Context

The source identifies Carlos Torres Barrera, Chief CDT Villadiego, as the study lead and describes the work within a FIRA trial context.

Measurement Control Crop Booster Difference
Hectoliter Weight 70.5 kg/hl 77 kg/hl +9.2% Calculated
Brix Raw Value Not Supplied Raw Value Not Supplied +100% · Source Reported
Average Raw Yield 9.16 ton/ha 9.19 ton/ha +0.03 ton/ha · ≈ +0.3%
Location: Villadiego, Mexico  ·  Date: March 2024
Crop: Maize
Study Lead: Carlos Torres Barrera
Role: Chief CDT Villadiego
Comparison: Crop Booster vs. Control Field
Control Hectoliter Weight: 70.5 kg/hl
Crop Booster Hectoliter Weight: 77 kg/hl
Calculated Hectoliter Weight Difference: Approximately +9.2%
Brix: +100% vs. Control · Source Reported
Control Raw Yield: 9.16 ton/ha
Crop Booster Raw Yield: 9.19 ton/ha
Calculated Raw Yield Difference: +0.03 ton/ha · Approximately +0.3%

The supplied source describes Crop Booster maize as having “10% higher test weight plant development.” The underlying measurements provided are 77 kg/hl for Crop Booster and 70.5 kg/hl for the control. Hectoliter weight is therefore presented here as the measured parameter rather than “plant weight.” The direct calculation is approximately +9.2%, which is consistent with a rounded 10% source description. The source reports Brix as 100% higher than the control but supplies neither the treated nor control Brix value, so the 100% figure cannot be independently recalculated. Average raw yield values are supplied as 9.19 ton/ha and 9.16 ton/ha, a difference of only 0.03 ton/ha, or approximately +0.3%. No statistical significance, moisture adjustment, grain-protein measurement, kernel-size distribution, production-cost data, input-use differences, or economic-return figures were supplied.

Why this matters for maize growers: This Villadiego comparison documents a clear difference in hectoliter weight, with Crop Booster maize measuring 77 kg/hl versus 70.5 kg/hl in the control. The source also reports a 100% higher Brix result. Raw yield, however, was nearly identical at 9.19 versus 9.16 ton/ha, so this case is strongest as a grain quality and test-weight comparison rather than a major yield-increase case.

Want to learn more about Harvest Harmonics technology or discuss your maize or corn operation with our team?

For Booking or Quotes Click Here
Prev
Next

Harvest Harmonics

We help farmers to increase their crop yield and profit and improve the quality of their products. We have the most advanced crop booster technology in agriculture.

Useful Links

  • About Us
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Successes
  • Contact Us
  • Get a Free Quote

Contact Info

  • geo611 Druid Rd, E Building 201
    Clearwater, FL 33756, USA
  • phone+1 727 324 6750
  • mailservice@harvestharmonics.com
  • mailMon – Fri: 08:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. ET

Social Media